By Larry Johnson
closeAuthor: Larry Johnson
Name: Larry Johnson
Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net
Site: http://NoQuarterUSA.net
About: Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.[1] He has worked as a private consultant on issues of international terrorism and security for the U.S. Government and private companies. Johnson has appeared as a consultant and commentator in many major newspapers and news programs.[2]
Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Views
2.1 1996
2.2 1998
2.3 1999
2.4 2000
2.5 2001
2.6 2003
2.6.1 Plame affair
2.7 2008
3 Notes
4 References
5 External links
[edit]Background
Larry Johnson moved to Washington, D.C. in 1979 to begin work on a Ph.D. at the American University. Although he completed successfully all coursework and comprehensive exams, he did not write a dissertation. In 1978 and in 1983-85 he worked in Latin America on community development projects as a community organizer. Returning to the United States in 1985 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, thanks in part to a letter of recommendation from Republican Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that helped to "open doors" for him at the Agency.[3] Johnson entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 and was a classmate of Valerie Plame. Every member of that class was undercover. After a year in the Career Trainee program, which included a stint with the Afghan Task Force, Johnson was assigned as an analyst in the Middle America Caribbean Division in the Latin American Affairs Office of the Directorate of Intelligence. He received two Exceptional Performance awards and was promoted ultimately to Senior Regional Analyst for Central America.
Johnson remained undercover in the CIA until October 1989, when he resigned from the CIA and started a new job in the Office of Counter Terrorism at the Department of State. Johnson played an instrumental role in launching the Terrorism Rewards program international advertising campaign (working with Diplomatic Security officers Brad Smith and Michael Parks). [4] Johnson also was involved in a variety of crisis management response operations, including the release of hostages from Lebanon and liaison with the Pan Am 103 families. He left government service in October 1993 and started his own business as a consultant.
After leaving government service, Johnson became a frequent guest on many major television news shows when a question of terrorism came up. He was first interviewed by CNN following the capture of Carlos the Jackal. Johnson subsequently appeared on CNN, ABC's Nightline, CBS, the BBC, MSNBC, the Jim Lehrer News Hour, NBC, and NPR. In December of 1999, for example, Johnson was hired by NBC to serve as its terrorist expert for the Y2000 and was in Time Square with Tom Brokaw and Katie Couric ("a lot of fun and the best way to see in the New Year"). Johnson also was hired in January 2002 as a Fox News Analyst and remained under contract until February 2003.
Since 1994 a significant focus of Johnson's consulting work has been with the U.S. military special operations forces in scripting and conducting military counter terrorism exercises. He traveled under orders from the U.S. military to Iraq in May 2006 to work on a short term project.
A registered Republican who supported President Bush in 2000, Johnson became a strong critic of the Bush administration in May 2003 for its conduct of the war in Iraq and, a few months later, for its role in the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame.[5] He was also featured in the 2004 political documentary Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism. Since Robert Novak's controversial disclosure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative in July 2003, Johnson has contributed to public discourse on intelligence matters, often sparking further controversy. He has been interviewed by both the mass media and the alternative media and published commentaries on a variety of issues, including the Plame affair, the controversy concerning Mary McCarthy, and the resignation of Porter Goss as Director of Central Intelligence.
[edit]Views
This article or section may contain an inappropriate mixture of prose and timeline.
Please help convert this timeline into prose or, if necessary, a list.
[edit]1996
In 1996, Johnson noted that terrorism worldwide was on the decline. "Terrorist incidents [both internationally and in the US] have fallen to levels not seen since the 1970s. Whether measured by the number of incidents, the number of fatalities, or the number of groups, raw statistics demonstrate that the level of terrorist violence has declined since the mid-1980s. In fact, the evidence suggests terrorism was more widespread and deadly 10 years ago."[6]
He also wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times suggesting that the newer and more deadly terrorist threat to the U.S. was embodied by "networks of terrorists, mostly foreign, working within its borders." Exemplifying this threat was Ramzi Yousef, one of the masterminds behind the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. In the article, Johnson suggests that enhanced cooperation between intelligence agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA, is mandatory to meet the growing threat of terror networks.[7]
[edit]1998
In 1998, Johnson argued that while overall terrorism was declining, the threat from bin Laden and al-Qaeda should be the focus of American counterterrorism policy:
The nature of the threat posed by Bin Ladin is highlighted by my final chart, number 7. Osama Bin Ladin and individuals associated with him have killed and wounded more Americans than any other group. This chart also illustrates that groups such as Hamas and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) prior to 1998 have killed more foreigners in the anti-US terrorist attacks. If we take into account the bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Osama's status as the most lethal terrorist is certain.[8]
In addition, he told USA Today that bin Laden had participated in "virtually every major attack of terrorism against the United States" in the 1990s. Johnson underlined the threat posed by bin Laden, saying that he was possessed by "hatred and craziness." If left unanswered, "he would continue to terrorize Americans around the world. He has no compunction about killing women and children. He's a complete egalitarian in his murderous attitude."[9]
[edit]1999
In an interview with PBS's Frontline for its 1999 program, Hunting bin Laden, Johnson discussed Osama bin Laden.[10] According to Johnson, Americans had "tended to make Osama bin Laden sort of a superman in Muslim garb." "Actually," he continues, "Osama bin Laden, in my view, represents more of a symptom of a problem, and the problem is this: the Saudi Arabian government, not just Osama bin Laden but many people in Saudi Arabia, have been sending money to radical Islamic groups for years." Johnson continued:
When you look at who's killed Americans in the last 10 years, the individuals he's supported and backed--I'm basing that upon the initial information that's been released in the indictments and conversations with others in the intelligence communities--Osama bin Laden has been the one killing Americans. No other terrorist group in the world has been out killing Americans except for Osama bin Laden.... Osama bin Laden remains out there as the one really targeting us. So, we recognize that he's the threat. He's serious about wanting to kill Americans, but as long as he's in Afghanistan, as long as he doesn't have access to a cell phone, as long as he can't just hop on a plane and travel wherever he wants without fear of being arrested, his ability to plan and conduct terrorist operations is extremely limited. We have to recognize [that] he would like to do a lot of damage. He would like to kill Americans, but wanting to is different from being able to, having the full capabilities in place.[11]
In the interview, Johnson doubted the ability of members of bin Laden's organization to plan and put their lives on the line:
There's not another Ali or Mustafa out there at this point and Osama bin Laden in my view has not been a very effective organizer or leader. He talks a great game and puts out terrific threats as far as stirring the passions in the United States and maybe firing up the imaginations of some young Muslims throughout the world. But when push comes to shove, can he get a group of people who are together who will say: we are going to plan an operation, we're going to put our lives on the line, we're going to go out and try and kill people and we don't care what the consequence is? It hasn't happened.[12]
Frontline asked:
[Is it] ... fair to say what you're saying is that the president of the United States, his national security advisor, his deputy national security advisor for counter-terrorism, are basically blowing smoke [about the danger posed by bin Laden] and his followers]?
Johnson responded:
They're grossly exaggerating the problem. They are hyping it. They shouldn't be talking about rising terrorism. Instead of saying "terrorism's rising," it's not. "Terrorism is spreading," it's not. "More people are dying from terrorism," not the case. But what they should be saying is, "There's one individual out there that really doesn't like us, and he's made it his mission in life to kill Americans, and we've gotta deal with him." But we need to have a voice of reason in that process instead of putting ourselves out crying wolf, because this is essentially what's taking place right now. They call it the administration that cries wolf.[12]
[edit]2000
Johnson co-authored an article in 2000 with Milt Bearden which focused on the threat posed by al-Qaeda specifically, rather than terrorism trends in general. Beardon and Johnson note that new information emerging about the bombings at Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 points to the threat posed by Imad Mugniyah and Osama Bin Laden will require "a coordinated policy that will employ a full range of covert, clandestine, diplomatic, and military operations," concluding:
The Clinton Administration has shot its bolt on the terrorist problem with small effect, and no last minute show of force will change the record. A new administration can start afresh with a more sharply defined set of terrorism goals – Mughniyeh and bin Laden and their protectors for starters – and bring the full, coordinated force of American diplomatic, military, and intelligence capabilities to bear on the problem.[13]
[edit]2001
After Johnson's testimony to the special forum at the U.S. Senate, Gary J. Schmitt, executive director and CEO of the Project for the New American Century, refers in the Daily Standard (blog) to an op-ed piece Johnson wrote two months prior to the 9/11 attacks, claiming that Johnson argued that the US had little to fear from terrorism.[14]
In an editorial entitled "The Declining Terrorist Threat," published in the New York Times on 10 July 2001, Johnson says:
Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.[15]
Ten days after the 9/11 attacks, after quoting the above passage, Timothy Noah concludes a post in his "Chatterbox" feature at Slate: "Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong."[16] Johnson defended himself against such attacks:
The rightwing is resurrecting an op-ed I wrote in July 2001. I stand by the full article. It is still relevant today. I am accused, incorrectly, of ignoring the threat of terrorism. In fact, I correctly noted that the real threat emanated from Bin Laden and Islamic extremism. President Bush, for his part, ignored the CIA warning in August 2001 that Al Qaeda was posed to strike inside the United States.[17]
After September 11, Johnson appeared several times on FOX News to address the question of military action against terrorism. On 14 November, he defended the FBI's proposal to interview 5,000 students in the U.S. suspected of having information relevant to the September 11 investigations:
I think they should talk to everyone that they feel they have a need to talk to. I mean, look, this is war. This is not a legal proceeding. This isn't the O.J. Simpson trial. The folks that attacked us -- they murdered Americans. And we've got to recognize that in wartime, we should do things differently.[18]
[edit]2003
In January 2003, Johnson wrote an analysis of the relationship between the upcoming U.S. invasion of Iraq and the threat of transnational terrorism. According to Johnson, Bremer's response was to tell him that "it didn't matter what Saddam did or didn't do, we were going to war."[19] The paper warned that an invasion would "do little to destroy the infrastructure of radical Islamic terrorism responsible for the 9-11 attacks." Noting that Saddam Hussein's regime has been a longtime supporter of regional terrorist organizations such as the PLO, Johnson examines contacts between Saddam Hussein and transnational terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda:
There is no doubt that Iraq is a state sponsor of terrorism—i.e., a country that provides financial support, safe haven, training, or weapons and explosives to groups or individuals that carry out terrorist attacks. . . . According to Central Intelligence Agency data, there is no credible evidence implicating Iraq in any mass casualty terrorist attacks since 1991. . . .
Johnson notes that the period immediately leading up to 2003 saw a rise of activity surrounding terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that "Iraq is willing to help a movement that it would otherwise oppose on ideological grounds. Nonetheless," Johnson concludes, "it is important to understand that Iraqi entreaties to Al Qaeda, are most likely intended as a tactic to bolster Iraq’s ability to fight off a U.S. invasion rather than a deep-seated theological and ideological commitment to the terrorist agenda of Bin Laden.[20]
In that analysis Johnson also warns that the U.S.-led invasion was likely to backfire:
In fact there is a serious risk that a U.S. led war against Iraq may crystallize the diffused anger in the Arab and Muslim world — a heretofore unattained goal of bin Laden and his followers — and persuade more Muslim youths to take up the terrorist banner against America and her citizens.... If we decide to invade Iraq we must be prepared for the contingency that our attack will inspire young Muslims to pursue jihad against the West in general and the United States in particular. Just as the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan rallied many Muslims, especially young adults to the cause of jihad, a U.S. attack may enable Islamic extremists to attract new followers.[20]
Johnson also gave interviews on the topic of what to do with captured al-Qaeda leaders; while he did not condone torture, he suggested that a "sleep deprivation and reward system" might be useful for getting information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
I don't see a constitutional right to have eight hours of sleep. You shouldn't subject someone to freezing but they don't get to wear mink coats, either.[21]
In May 2003, Johnson joined members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) in condemning the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes:
It is a misuse and abuse of intelligence. The president was being misled. He was ill served by the folks who are supposed to protect him on this. Whether this was witting or unwitting, I don't know, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.[22]
[edit]Plame affair
After Robert Novak wrote a column identifying the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson as a CIA officer, the media invited Johnson to comment on the ensuing scandal because he had been a member of the same Career Trainee class with Valerie Plame Wilson. For example, in October 2003, he appeared on Democracy Now to discuss the Plame affair. He told interviewer Amy Goodman that Valerie Wilson's cover should have been respected whether she was an "analyst" or a "cleaning lady": "if she's undercover she's undercover, period. If the media allows themselves to get distracted with those kinds of curve balls, they ignore the issue."[23]
He told a Senate Democratic Policy Committee in October 2003, "My classmates and I have been betrayed. Together, we have kept the secrets of each other's identities a secret for 18 years. Each and every one of us have kept that secret, whether we were in the CIA, in other government service or in the private sector. But this issue is not just about a blown cover. It is about the destruction of the very essence, the core of human intelligence collection activities: plausible deniability, apparently, for partisan domestic political reasons."[24]
Johnson testified at a special joint hearing of Congressional and Senate Democrats on 22 July 2005 about the consequences arising from the Plame affair.[25]
[edit]2008
In 2008, Johnson emerged as a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton and a strong critic of Barack Obama. Larry Johnson's blog, NoQuarterUSA, became a rally point for Clinton supporters wary of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Supporters of Barack Obama insist that a story that first appeared on Johnson's blog--a report that Republican operatives have a tape of Michelle Obama making racially insenstive comments about caucasians--has been "refuted" Barack Obama's Fight the Smears website.[26]. However, Johnson never claimed to have the tape and reported that the Republican operatives controlling it intended to release the tape sometime after the Democratic Convention in August 2008. On October 21, however, he asserted that the operative in possession of the tape had been instructed by the McCain campaign not to release it.[27]
[edit]Notes
^ http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-political-coverage/
^ Larry C. Johnson, "About Me," No Quarter (personal blog).
^ "Former CIA Official Larry Johnson Delivers Democratic Radio Address," transcript posted on official Democratic National Committee's website for The Democratic Party, July 23, 2005], accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Interview with Larry Johnson, confirmed by his supervisor
^ "Ex-CIA official Blasts Bush on Leak of Operative's Name: Democrats' Radio Address Focuses on White House Aides' Role," CNN July 23, 2005, accessed November 21, 2006.
^ Gail Russell Chaddock, "Why Terrorists Pick On the French," Christian Science Monitor (5 December 1996) p. 1.
^ Larry Johnson, "Terrorists Among Us," New York Times (20 August 1996) p. A19.
^ Terrorism Today
^ Lee Michael Katz, "The Hunt for Bin Laden," USA Today (21 August 1998) p. 1A.
^ See Transcript of original interview with Larry C. Johnson, as broadcast on Frontline in 1999. Cf. "Interview: Larry C. Johnson," for Hunting bin Laden, transcript of interview broadcast on Frontline subsequently on 13 April 2001. See also dedicated PBS webpages for media links: Iraq and the War on Terror, Frontline PBS, online featured programs, accessed 19 November 2006.
^ frontline: hunting bin laden: interviews: larry c. johnson | PBS
^ a b [1].
^ As posted in [2].
^ Gary Schmitt, [ 07/25/2005 "Meet Larry Johnson: The CIA official Turned Democratic Spokesman Has a Pre-9/11 Mindset," Daily Standard (blog), July 25, 2005, accessed November 20, 2006.
^ *Larry C. Johnson, "The Declining Terrorist Threat," The New York Times 10 July 2001: A19.
^ Timothy Noah, "(Not Exactly a) Whopper of the Week: Larry C. Johnson," Chatterbox: Gossip, speculation, and scuttlebutt about politics (blog), hosted by Slate September 21, 2001, accessed November 20, 2006. Note the full context of this quotation:
It is, to be sure, a little bit cheap (and slightly at odds with the usual parameters of this feature) to criticize someone for making an erroneous prediction, particularly after a tragedy. Chatterbox is especially reluctant to tag Johnson because Johnson's op-ed was argued forcefully, backed up meticulously with factual data, and bravely at odds with conventional wisdom at the time of its publication. Add in that Johnson now makes his living as a consultant to corporations about terrorism, and therefore had everything to gain by exaggerating the dangers terrorism poses, and the guy practically looks like a hero. Chatterbox, who two decades ago was an editor for the New York Times op-ed page, would have published Johnson's piece had he still been an editor there this past July. In his capacity at Slate, Chatterbox might well have written up Johnson's prediction, and perhaps even endorsed it.
But boy, is he glad he didn't! Johnson's analysis, we now see, was bold, persuasive, and 100 percent wrong. Sadly, a mistake this embarrassing cannot be ignored. As a fellow skeptic, Chatterbox in all sincerity wishes Johnson better luck next time.
^ Larry C. Johnson, "Johnson vs. President Bush," re-posted and updated by SusanHu at DailyKos (blog) July 25, 2005.
^ FOX News Interview with John Garrett (14 November 2001) Transcript #111405cb.260.
^ [3].
^ a b Larry C. Johnson, "Setting the Record Straight on Iraqi Terrorism," posted in Booman Tribune: A Progressive Community (personal blog) 27 January 2003. accessed 19 November 2006.
^ Qtd. in Toby Harnden, "CIA 'pressure' on al-Qa'eda chief," The London Telegraph 5 March 2003: 16.
^ Qtd. in Nicolas D. Kristof, "Save Our Spooks," The New York Times 30 May 2003:A6.
^ Democracy Now (3 October 2003)[4]
^ U.S. Senate, Democratic Policy Committee Meeting on the CIA Operative Leak, (24 October 2003).
^ Letter to the Senate.[Needs full source citation; see "References" section.]
^ Tumulty, Karen (2008-06-12). "Will Obama's Anti-Rumor Plan Work?", Time Magazine. Retrieved on 20 June 2008.:"a story that apparently first made a big splash on the Internet in late May in a post by pro-Hillary Clinton blogger Larry Johnson"
^ Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy MartinSee Authors Posts (1090) on October 19, 2007 at 10:36 PM in Current Affairs
Four years and three months after waking up on a Sunday morning and learning that her career as a clandestine intelligence officer was over because of a stupid column by Robert Novak, Valerie Plame Wilson finally gets to meet the public and tell some of her story.
Sunday night she appears on 60 Minutes, and kicks off a book tour that will start Monday morning on the Today Show and include stops at Larry King Live and the Daily Show. Unfortunately, Val cannot be totally forthcoming. I am not talking about revealing sources or methods that would compromise intelligence operations. She is a solid professional and would never entertain such nonsense. But the CIA succeeded in getting a Federal judge to block Val from admitting that she started working with the CIA in September of 1985.
It is as if Rod Serling has returned from the dead with a 21st Century version of the Twilight Zone. The CIA won the initial round in Federal Court and insists Valerie cannot acknowledge working at the CIA prior to February 2002. Because of a pending appeal in her freedom of speech case against the CIA, she cannot say anything about joining the CIA in September of 1985 fresh out of college. She cannot say anything about her initial impression of her Career Trainee classmates–such as Jim Marcinkowski, Brent Cavan, Mike “the Griz” Grimaldi, Precious Flower, and mois. She is proscribed from telling you about wandering the forests of Camp Peary learning land navigation and she certainly will not, at least for now, be able to tell you about being taken hostage and subjected to torture for two days.
Valerie especially cannot tell you about her first tour overseas as a case officer. Ironically, her first boss overseas–Fred Rustmann–has gone on the record and tried early on in this scandal to argue that she was not a NOC (i.e., Non Official Cover officer). But Fred, who was forced out of the CIA and into early retirement because of misdeeds overseas, was not around long enough to learn that after her first tour Val was given the opportunity to become a NOC.
Not only did she get the opportunity. She took full advantage of it and embarked on a career that would change her life in ways she never imagined. She walked away from diplomatic cover and was left naked of the protection normally accorded to diplomats. She had to rely on her wits and tradecraft, and did so successfully for many years, until betrayed by the Bush Administration. But she cannot tell you about that period. At least not now.
Her publisher, Simon and Schuster, came up with a nifty idea to tell the story of the period of service Valerie cannot talk about. They hired Laura Rozen and she interviewed people like me, who served with Valerie. Laura does a great job but it is still a second best solution.
Come Monday you can read for yourself the legal documents surrounding Valerie’s case. They will be posted at www.fairgameplame.com.
We do know this one key thing with certainty–Valerie was not some low level, desk jockey, secretary taking up space and using oxygen at the CIA. The CIA does not prevent such people from telling their story. Nope. Valerie’s very existence as a CIA operative is deemed by the CIA to be so sensitive a topic that she can say nothing about activities prior to February 2002. But she can admit that in February 2002 she was a senior covert operations officer involved in projects that went to the heart of the President’s highest priority–finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Valerie’s identity and ability to carry out that mission during a time of war were compromised by Dick Cheney, Sccoter Libby, Ari Fleischer, and Karl Rove. Their actions were both treasonous and cowardly. Yet the person being penalized and compelled to sacrifice her constitutional right of free speech is Valerie Plame Wilson. The good news is that the American people will finally get to meet the classy, smart lady I served with at the CIA. She achieved her aspiration to be good intelligence officer and still found balance in her life to be a good wife and a good mother. She lost her career and her ability to help support her family. As a nation we have been deprived of her service because of the pettiness and stupidity of the Bush Administration. A successful book tour will be small recompense for the loss Val has experienced. But let’s hope its enough to ensure that Val, Joe, and the kids have a happy, long life.
(small, medium and large sizes; for both dogs and cats)
+ 
Thanks Larry for telling part of Valerie’s story. You and she are exactly the kind of people I wish were still watching our backs in the intel game. Nevertheless I am grateful, for your vigilance on this blog, and in the media. And for Valerie and Joe never giving in to the bastards. You all represent exactly why I and nearly everyone in my family has served in the military–no one’s gonna hurt you tonight, not on my watch. Thanks.
Larry - you are a good American and obviously, a loyal friend. Someday, Ms. Wilson will be able to tell the real story. Until then, the nation is fortunate to have brave people such as yourself to speak out on her behalf.
I was stunned and upset to read the following line from your post:
In light of everything we know about this administration and its commitment to violating the Geneva Conventions, that one fact will stick out like a sore thumb and keep poking us all in the eye.
I hope Ms. Wilson comes to Seattle for her book tour because I can promise I’ll be in attendance. I met her husband last year at a fundraiser for Darcy Burner and I value his willingness to speak the truth and confront the administration. That characteristic seems to run in those in her circle.
me too phone, that very statement got me right in the heart of the matter.
Larry I really wished you could elaborate a little on that one…
I know you can not tell us much but this has gotten my query up and would certainly love to know of this torture thing
Please publish her book schedule!
I LOVE the internets tubes!
But the CIA succeeded in getting a Federal judge to block Val from admitting that she started working with the CIA in September of 1985.
So much for CIA secrecy.
As the others have said, I appreciate your giving us the heads up about Valerie appearing on 60 Minutes; I look forward to it…even though she can’t say all she should be allowed to. It really IS courageous people like you, and Valerie, and Joe Wilson that we look to in times that seem so hopeless and with administrations so completely corrupt.
Truth wins out. As was said, thank God for the Internet….and for this and other blogs..where we can feel free…at least for now.
One really unfortunate part of this scenario is that the 60 Minutes interview was conducted by Katie Couric.
Could the network have chosen a less credible interviewer? I don’t think so.
Thanks Larry, we look forward to Sunday. I caught the CBS preview on the evening news tonight.
SantaFe looks great.
Good luck on your interview, it will be one of the most important.
I now prepare to hold my stomach as the rightwing hate machine fires up to attack our patriot Valerie Plame. I’m getting so sick of the jingoistic dittoheads.
Now, on with the countdown
Larry,
I can understand your/her frustration with some of these limitations, but I don’t think it is such a big deal.
The American people KNOW she was covert, we KNOW that she was shamelessly outed by the devil’s very own Cheney.
We also certainly are proud and grateful for her service.
I think it would be a better book overall, and for history’s sake, for her to talk about what this act of treason has done to her family.
What could stop an Al-Quaeda nut from filling her full of holes as she goes to the supermarket?
Who protects her at book signings?
The government should be shamed into providing her with some protection.
The Wilson’s are patriots in the truest sense.
They knew Washington well enough to know there would be reprisals.
They spoke truth to power in an attempt to save the thousands of lives of young brave Americans.
I would buy her book to support as my show of support and protest her no matter what it contains.
I meant to say I would buy her book as a show of support and protest.
I look forward to Sunday. Thanks Larry, you’re a class act and whoever is fortunate enough to call you a friend, has a friend indeed.
thanks, this is always one of the best places to visit.
did I miss where the questions we asked might have been answered?
Larry, again, Val’s champion spokeman. She is lucky to have you as a friend. She and Joe and you continue to amaze me. You all have the courage and the integfrity to keep telling the truth no matter what. Be well, be safe. I am sure you all are “tapped”.
“Her publisher, Simon and Schuster, came up with a nifty idea to tell the story of the period of service Valerie cannot talk about. They hired Laura Rozen and she interviewed people like me, who served with Valerie.”
This is classic. Whoever had the idea is a genius.
Thanks for the heads up, I’d probably have missed it.
And thank you for your blog, Larry. Patriotism in action.
Valerie’s friends can say what Valerie can’t, about what has already been made public? It’s an absurd situation for Valerie. But at least she has good friends willing to help.
Saw a preview of Couric’s interview and Plame said, “There was significant damage.” Her entire operation tracking Iraq’s WMD was shut down. She couldn’t call any of her assets, who’d been exposed by Novak et al, to ask them if they were OK without endangering them further. Although, she said, she wanted to.
But these criminals, who exposed her, can talk about her without consequences.
You may….or not….have already seen this:
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/CBS_confirms_2006_Raw_Story_scoop_1020.html
CBS CONFIRMS 2006 RAW STORY SCOOP: PLAME’S JOB WAS TO KEEP NUKES FROM IRAN
Muriel Kane and Dave Edwards
Published: Saturday October 20, 2007
CBS News has confirmed, in advance of a 60 Minutes interview with outed CIA agent Valerie Plame to be run this Sunday, that Plame “was involved in operations to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons.”
“Our mission was to make sure that the bad guys, basically, did not get nuclear weapons,” Plame told 60 Minutes. Plame also indicated that her outing in 2003 had caused grave damage to CIA operations, saying, “All the intelligence services in the world were running my name through their databases” to see where she had gone and who she had met with.
RAW STORY first revealed Plame’s Iran mission and the damage done to CIA operations by her outing in a February 13, 2006 story by Raw investigative editor Larisa Alexandrovna, titled “Outed CIA officer was working on Iran, intelligence sources say.” In that article, Alexandrovna wrote:
According to current and former intelligence officials, Plame Wilson, who worked on the clandestine side of the CIA in the Directorate of Operations as a non-official cover (NOC) officer, was part of an operation tracking distribution and acquisition of weapons of mass destruction technology to and from Iran.
Speaking under strict confidentiality, intelligence officials revealed heretofore unreported elements of Plame’s work. Their accounts suggest that Plame’s outing was more serious than has previously been reported and carries grave implications for U.S. national security and its ability to monitor Iran’s burgeoning nuclear program. …
Intelligence sources would not identify the specifics of Plame’s work. They did, however, tell RAW STORY that her outing resulted in “severe” damage to her team and significantly hampered the CIA’s ability to monitor nuclear proliferation. …
Three intelligence officers confirmed that other CIA non-official cover officers were compromised, but did not indicate the number of people operating under non-official cover that were affected or the way in which these individuals were impaired. None of the sources would say whether there were American or foreign casualties as a result of the leak.
A few months following Alexandrovna’s groundbreaking revelations, MSNBC’s David Shuster reported that he had also been told by his own sources of Plame’s involvement in an Iran operation and the damage done by her outing.
CBS states further that Plame “was involved in one highly classified mission to deliver fake nuclear weapons blueprints to Tehran. It was called Operation Merlin, and it was first revealed in a book by investigative reporter James Risen.”
Risen’s book, State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration, was published in October 2006, eight months after Alexandrovna’s initial reporting. Risen discussed Project Merlin in the book but did not mention that Plame had been part of it.
Reached on Saturday morning, Alexandrovna said she had known of Project Merlin when she wrote her 2006 article but was not allowed to discuss the operation, as per her agreement with sources, just the country involved. “I cannot confirm or deny that Plame was connected with Project Merlin, only that I was aware of it,” Alexandrovna told Raw.
The following video is from CBS’s Evening News, broadcast on October 19, 2007.
uh…where I come from they call that T R E A S O N….
We don’t live there anymore. Not that any of us actually moved or anything …
Larry, thanks to you and your colleagues for telling Valerie Wilson’s story. I realize that just because information is in the public domain doesn’t mean it’s not classified, but even so the court’s decision on this makes no sense whatsoever. This subject has been discussed so thoroughly that you’d have to think that even the most overburdened intelligence agency would have looked into all the things Mrs. Wilson could tell us about her career already. Heck, I remember hearing when she graduated from college, and I could certainly make a guess about when she started with the CIA just based on that.
1985 - 1986 (esp 2/86). Iran. I can’t think of *any* reason anyone who was leading the CIA back then (e.g. the current Defense Secretary) wouldn’t want people writing or talking about what was going on back then.
LOLOL! I needed a good laugh. Hmmmmmmmmm…arms for hostages scandal?
Thanks so much for your involvement in this, Larry, and for maintaining a site where Valerie’s story and other important stories can be told. Everyday it becomes riskier. A lot of us are behind screen names (not that that matters much to the watchers), but you’re certainly out in the open.) Thanks for everything you do.
Joe Wilson, and by way of collateral damage Valerie Plame, were not the first victims of these crooks.
They had practice. Rich Barlow. The man who knew too much.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/pakistan/Story/0,,2188777,00.html
Fascinating and infuriating story. I’m back to thinking about blowback or is this creating the enemies you need later.
Greed?
What?
Drewsky, thanks again for posting that article. Let me add something I just found.
Revealed: How to make a N-Bomb
The man wearing sack cloth and ashes to apologise before Pakistanis, Dr AQ Khan, is no “father figure.” Wilson John unravels his role in a deadly blackmarket which thrived with official backing in Islamabad and more than a wink from Washington DC.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnist1.asp?main_variable=Columnist&file_name=john%2Fjohn30.txt&writer=john
Can’t wait to see 60 Minutes and for your interview as well Larry.
so the breaking CBS story via RAW tonight - always what I thought - Cheney knew long ago plans were in the works to attack Iran and that is why Valerie was outed.
at what point is enough fuc*ing enough!!!!!!!!!!
[...] Valerie Plame Wilson speaks muzzled and Larry Johnson ( No Quarter ) will gleefully tell you what she can’t ! [...]
[...] on 60 Minutes, Valerie Plame Wilson drops what hints of her story she can (her old CIA colleague Larry Johnson and Raw Story, not having been quite so muzzled by court order, can and do say more). Before Dick [...]
I’m really looking forward to this interview. Maybe I shouldn’t say this but I have an uncle who retired from the agency.
We suspected where he worked but never knew it until he retired.
To this day he refuses to say one word about what he did.
What a sacrifice these people make!
And we’ve suspected and now believe that betraying Mrs. Wilson was a two-fer - to trivialize Ambassador Wilson’s report that there was no yellowcake sale to Iraq and also to destroy her efforts to disrupt their plans for war in the Middle East. She may have prevented a planted WMD in Iraq (See! they really DO have nukes!). And, now Iran, too. OMG. What an utter horror this administration is.
First off, I think Cheney and Bush are scum that deserve to be tried for treason, convicted and either exiled or executed. I favor the former, providing we don’t have to pay for security. Secondly, I trust no one that works for the CIA or who has ever worked for the CIA. I’m really curious how those here who agree about Bush/Cheney default to supporting the likes of Plame/Wilson and now Larry Johnson? These CIA types have done zero to convince me that they have the interests of the people of the U.S.A. at heart. Tenet and his guys are the ones I blame for the war, as much as Bush and Cheney. If they are so brave, why didn’t they walk when everyone realized what lies were being fabricated to back Bush’s war? Now they expect credit for their bravery? I don’t think so.
Well Mr. Thair, the question now begs to be asked - why are you here?
Is it to admonish us who support the Wilsons or Larry? (among others) We who obviously are not as enlightened as you are?
Can you be more explicit on whom you believe expects credit for their bravery?
I’m also assuming that you are not a 9/11 conspiracist. Am I correct?
“Why am I here?” Not sure what you mean by “here” but I am on this board looking for answers. Unless this is simply for the believers of whatever is posted here, I would like to hear why it is none of these “heroes” spoke up sooner? I’m not even sure what a “9/11 conspiracist” is, nor am I sure how “brave” these folks are to be publishing books about things they’ve been saying publicly. Furthermore, how is the CIA so lame as to allow one person to publish a set of facts that another person is able to publish? Personally, I don’t trust anyone who was working to put Iran out of business, when Israel is doing worse. Why hasn’t anyone in this group said something about that contradiction? Plame who war apparently working to monitor Iran, yet Israel already has these weapons yet no one wants to mention that little contradiction. This whole damn country is a combination of half-wits willing to believe one side or the other based on the latest book that is being published, even though they admit the books being published are half-truths. Makes no sense to me.
Let me edit my response below. In haste, I failed to type correctly. BTW, is taters a name or are you anonymous?
“Why am I here?” Not sure what you mean by “here” but I am on this board looking for answers. Unless this is simply for the believers of whatever is posted here, I would like to hear why it is none of these “heroes” spoke up sooner? I’m not even sure what a “9/11 conspiracist” is, nor am I sure how “brave” these folks are to be publishing books about things they’ve been saying publicly. Furthermore, how is the CIA so lame as to not allow one person to publish a set of facts that another person is able to publish? Personally, I don’t trust anyone who was working to put Iran out of business, when Israel is doing worse. Why hasn’t anyone in this group said something about that contradiction? Plame who was apparently working to monitor Iran, yet Israel already has these nuclear weapons yet no one wants to mention that little contradiction. This whole damn country is a combination of half-wits willing to believe one side or the other based on the latest book that is being published, even though they admit the books being published are half-truths. Makes no sense to me.
Oh Robert..
BTW, is taters a name or are you anonymous?
if you read this board for more than 2 hours who would know who Taters is..
jeez once a week we get a know-it-all that comes here and spouts thier version of BS.
Ok so larry has already put you in your place so no need to pile on here so i won’t.
Wait..ok i will alittle..
Larry..come clean about the CIA..
that has got to be the dumbest statement i have ever heard..are you serious? go away troll..
You make some good points about the CIA. I’ve been a huge critic.
You’re missing the point here. Valarie was doing a dangerous job for this government and was exposed to death by the traitors that we all want brought to justice.
For the record, I hope Iran can defend themselves after what this administration has done to Iraq and in considering our hypocrisy regarding Israel
We have no right to tell anyone what weapons they can or can’t have.
Robert Thair writes: I trust no one that works for the CIA or who has ever worked for the CIA. I’m really curious how those here who agree about Bush/Cheney default to supporting the likes of Plame/Wilson and now Larry Johnson? These CIA types have done zero to convince me that they have the interests of the people of the U.S.A. at heart.
Ironically, the clandestine nature of much CIA work is such that when done well and in service to the country, we of necessity will never hear of it.
It’s when rogue agents, administrations or other bad actors apply a warped set of values to the agency’s services– that’s when whistles are blown and the gory details will out. And in many cases, it’s CIA agents who blow the whistles, and don’t forget that some have done so in the wake of the Bush administration’s perversion of the agency’s purpose.
So, I suppose you should be forgiven for succumbing to what I used to call the “belching bus” fallacy. It went like this: Most folks would tell you that the average city bus, back in the diesel days, was a smoke belching behemoth, but the reality was that this was rare. But, you see, the smoke-belching buses were the only ones they would notice. Capische?
I don’t imagine that your misgivings about the agency or its personnel will be allayed by Valerie’s coming round of interviews in concert with the release of her book– including a lengthy one with farm-mate Larry which I especially look forward to– but do a half-wit a favor and listen anyway. It may help you to appreciate that the CIA is not the comic-book all-powerful monolithic evil depicted in some regrettable recent movies, but an organization comprised of human beings, with all the failings and flaws that entails, trying to do the right thing for the common good.
Well, most of ‘em, anyway. Larry, I think, was trying to overthrow Liechtenstein.
[...] official Larry Johnson provides some interesting details of a spy whose 17 year career was ruined because she… uh… didn’t do anything [...]
I just want to know if the anonymous star on the Wall of Honor that falls within the period she was betrayed is related to her betrayal.
The CIA has been implicated in so many wars and assassinations over the last fifty years that until they come clean and tell the truth about these acts, I can’t believe anyone would accept their criticisms of any administration. After all, they have been in lockstep with so many acts of terror, one has to ask himself, if not for the CIA do we even have a problem with Iran or Iraq? Ask Larry Johnson or Plame to explain why the “jackals” in the CIA were responsible for the assassinations of President Omar Torrijos of Panama and President Jaime Roldas of Ecuador.
And there is simply no way around the fact - the United States of America allowed Saddam Hussein to be targeted for assassination by the very pro-Iranian Shia party that is responsible for killing hundreds of Americans in terrorist bombings. To accept that Plame was “covert” when she wasn’t attending to her twins and going to PTA meetings, is a huge stretch and one must wonder how it is so many are willing to take up her flag, without an explanation as to why she would want to fight for her position given the mafia like crimes of the organization she works for?
Glad to be able to buy her book & support your site at the same time.
BTW, have you suggested she appear [perhaps during one of your "Ask the Spy Guy" segments] on the Stephanie Miller Show?
Also looking forward to seeing her on The Daily Show. Don’t know if I can stomach Katie Couric; maybe I’ll TiVo it and ff through Katie’s portions.
Hope she visits Politics & Prose in DC, and the Diane Rehm Show as well.
I’m wondering if there were two reasons the bush administration went after Ms. Plame and revealed her status so she could no longer work.
One was to get back at Joe Wilson
Two. to get rid of Valerie Plame. It is not too far fetched to believe that this administration has been after Iran too, as it was with Iraq. If Ms. Plame was compromised,and the work she was doing re: Iran and its nuclear weapons, it has made it easier for this administration to lie about what is really going on in Iran. Maybe she was not a bush”team player” as other CIA workers were in the lead up to Iraq.
Would it not be interesting if the real reason for this outing was to get her out of the CIA and the excuse was her husband?
Here’s what really happened:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/10/17432/5123
I just watched 60 minutes. Valerie was incredible. I don’t know how someone could watch her and not see the truth in her words. I hope this will be devastating but I doubt it since there are so many people who will defend Bush and Cheney even in all their lies.
[...] Some what she’s not allowed to say, including details about “being taken hostage and subjected to torture for two days,” is covered by her former CIA colleague, Larry Johnson, right here… [...]
This attack upon a working CIA “NOC” should have led to trials for HIGH TREASON for “some” members of the Executive Branch. How many”assets” were put in danger and most probably killed(and tortured) to cover up a very poor forgery and a monstorous lie.
Perhaps it’s time for the CIA to “interrogate” some of the Executive Branch and find out EXACTLY what is being done to the World in the name of the American People. The CIA does not need to reveal any State Secrets to the Public after it’s investigation.We will know the outcome when certain Public Servants dissappear.They can even “outsource” the proccess like they did to our neighbor from Canada and countless others.
Alot of powerful people have alot to answer for.Close to 1 million lives in Iraq alone according to consevative estimates. Besides,I think it would give our leaders a little perspective on how their actions affect the already hard lives of people.
They don’t even need to resort to the horrifying techniques that Gonzales and his other friends in the De Sade Fan Club have tried to make legal.(Any action short of causing organ failure or death).How compassionate of them.
Just a few days,cold alone in the dark,unfed,humiliated and not allowed to sleep,with no hope of Daddy or his Buddies bailing them out this time. This spineless bunch would spill their guts if you just TOLD THEM that this was in store for them.They would sellout their own children,just like they have sold out ours as a matter of course.
I think this would all fall under “Equal Protection Under the Law”. How many Nations can Kissinger visit without being arrested and put on trial for Crimes Against Humanity? Not many!
From the Supreme Court stopping the Florida recount in the 2000 election,to invading a Nation that was to weak to even feed it’s own children.(Oil for Food was such a compassionate Program) There is alot to explain.Pick an honest Jury of their Peers,and let the chips fall where they may. Like I said,keep your State Secrets and let them dissapear with the other Terrorists into Legal Limbo.They created it,they must agree that it is only fair,it’s the way they wanted it.
But even I could not condone that,it’s why my Family sailed on the Mayflower,and fought in the Revoultion and worked hard everyday to make the world better for everyone.To free us of self appointed “Emperors” and “Kings”.
Do a Google search on Sen.DeCamp,Larry King,kidnappings from “BoysTown”,and you will see what some of this “Class” does for entertainment!
Caligula would fit right in at some of their parties. Didn’t Poppa Bush say something to the effect that”If the American Public knew what we had done they would hang us from the nearest lampost.” Not an exact quote but close enough to ask a few follow up questions I would think.
It is time for We The People to reclaim ourRights as the FIRST BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT,from which ALL other powers are Granted,accepting ONLY those Specificly Enumerated in the Constitution.
I think that Ron Paul is the only Candidate that has even read the Constitution,nevermind understanding it’s implications.
I’ll stop now,when PATRIOTS like Valerie Plame are thrown away like an anoying stone in their shoe it is easy to dicern GOOD from EVIL.
Thank You Valarie,you will be remebered as a real Hero and Patriot.
This was a big loss for her career, a bigger loss for America.
As for the reason why she was pushed to outing, Cheney lied repeatedly and pushed on all fronts. He did so to make certain he could get his war going(”Everything related and unrelated.”) Perhaps the intent was to deduct exactly who or what was providing resistance from outside of our traditional diplomatic channels, because the NSA eavesdropping was going on before 9-11.
They wanted Iraq and Iran, and knew the best way to do so was to end run procedure and spy on our own.
Condi, busy at this time, being buggered by Russia and China on a world stage, should have to answer for it.
“But the CIA succeeded in getting a Federal judge to block Val from admitting that she started working with the CIA in September of 1985.” We are a nation without laws. The perversion of justice has taken quite a while to entrench in the federal system but it’s there.
There is a loyal opposition in this country but it’s not found in the form of the Democratic Party. It consists of people like you, Plame, others in and out of government, the 70% of citizens who disapprove of Bush, and a potent minority in the corporate media.
There’s no reason to tolerate Bush or his enablers one more minute by holding back on who they actually are - criminals supported by those who enable the crimes to continue.
Thanks to Valeria Plame and the other members of the most loyal opposition.
Valerie Plame is not a hero. She had a good job with ‘The Company’. She lost it because her husband is a hero. He did try to prevent the carnage and war crimes we see committed in Iraq on a daily basis, now for nigh on five years. If Valerie was working to prevent Iran from entering the nuclear club, there is nothing holy in that. Muslim nations need nukes to level the playing field. They have suffered enought under the jackboot of Israeli/American dominance. Joe is a good old boy and we owe him thanks for trying: For fighting for truth. God bless him and his. And, God bless Iran. The demons are skulking outside her door.
Val is a hero for not rolling over and accepting the blow. She stood up and sought to face down Cheney and crew. Probably more than the rest of ya. Do a little research on what a hero is. It doesn’t require a penis to be a hero. Joe was a hero for standing up to these same punks and his face down with Saddam should be legend. Its more than any of these chickenhawks could do. But to say Valerie was just hanging out trying to “prevent iran from entering the nuclear club” is stupid. You don’t know what she did, and yet you quickly claim she’s no hero based on your gnatlevel knowledge of her background? lame.
I agree with Dave. The real hero was her husband. Indeed Valerie was grossly abused and the Bush admin should be impeached, charged with treason and eventually executed according to the law. However as Dave says, Iran has not only got every right to develop nuclear weapons but they would be advised to do so considering Israeli and US actions, words and history.
Nevertheless, I have faith that Iran has NOT sought nuclear weapons before now, instead having lived by the still current FATWA, by Khomenei years ago, which declared Nuclear Weapons to be UN-Muslim.
I wonder how many of these armchair strategists even realise that if Iran is a radically religious as they want to believe, then they are the most likely to take a Fatwa by the highest religious authority among them, seriously. Iran is subject to a Fatwa now of many years standing in which they forswear neclear weapons.
There is NO proof that Iran supports any terrorism. They do support Hisb’ Allah and Hamas, but these are only terrorist groups in name. Both groups exist to defend their homeland against incursions by violent, even genocidal foreign powers. The attackers call their victims terrorists, but facts are not altered by misusing words. In this Iran is merely supporting two groups of freedom fighters. Their actions in doing so are no less mature, considered or legitimate than the support given by the USA to various regimes, many of which are without any doubt terrorists and brutal human rights violators.
Technically speaking if we shall judge without reference to religion or skin colour, then the truest examples of terrorists are the two states, USA and Israel. This is NOT debateable, unless you assign different values to life depending upon nationality or religion.
If you sincerely believe that 100 Arab lives are worth but ONE American or Israeli life, then things are about equal, neither side is more grotesquely violent and destructive than the other.
The other extreme is that if you believe instead, as most religions teach, that every life is equally precious, then Israel and the USA are about one hundred times more violent and murderous than their Arab, VICTIMS, and Victims is not an unreasonable word to use in this case either. I tend towards believing that any human life, on balance is of equal worth at least in the eyes of God.
Valarie Plame is pretty hot. She’s like a real-life Kim Possible. I’d let her kick my butt any time…
Do you have any information about book signings or scheduled appearances for her book tour?
If you want to compare the CIA’s misdeeds with smoke-belching buses, let’s face it: there have been a lot of these buses, some of them quite monstrous. I imagine Smedley Butler would have had some choice comparisons to make about the CIA.
Its a shame that the CIA can’t accuse those who leak its secrets because they live in the White House. Why can’t our own government police itself? In an ideal world I would see the US Secret Service accompanied by the FBI showing up in Bush’s Oval office, telling him to put his hands behind his back and reading his miranda rights. Instead we have a White House that uses the Justice Department to obstruct justice.
Maybe we need another Constitutional Convention and do a rewrite?
Hey, does Frankenstein’s monster know you raided his wardrobe? And it’s “moi,” you moron.
In a July 17 column in the Star Tribune, Johnson attacks the Bush administration for allegedly blowing Plame’s cover and concludes with these words: “At the end of the day, Wilson was right. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It was the Bush administration that pushed that lie, and because of that lie Americans are dying. Shame on those who continue to slander Joe Wilson while giving Bush and his pack of liars a pass. That’s the true outrage.”
Of course, if the Bush administration lied about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction (WMD), then every major intelligence agency in the world lied, Arab leaders lied, and the Clinton administration lied for eight years. Clinton’s top expert on Iraq, Kenneth Pollack, had to be a liar since in The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq (2002) Pollack claimed, among other things, that “The German intelligence service, using methods it won’t divulge, estimated in 2001 that Iraq was three to six years from having a nuclear weapon.” Pollack’s book was written with the imprimatur of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). CFR’s board of directors includes at least six Clinton administration officials, including Madeleine Albright and Richard Holbrooke.
If the Bush administration lied about Iraq having WMD, then there is yet another person who lied. Visitors to Wilson’s own web site can find several columns that he has written over the past few years. On October 13, 2002, Wilson wrote a column entitled “How Saddam Thinks” for the San Jose Mercury News. In this column, Wilson asks, “Can we disarm Saddam this time without risking a chemical attack or a broader regional war that threatens our allies?”
Risk a chemical attack from a country that posed no threat because it had no WMD?
Wilson also referred to Iraq’s WMD in a February 6, 2003 column in The Los Angeles Times: “There is now no incentive for Hussein to comply with the inspectors or to refrain from using weapons of mass destruction to defend himself if the United States comes after him. And he will use them; we should be under no illusion about that.” This column was published just nine days after President Bush’s 2003 State of the Union address, the address in which Bush said, “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” However, Wilson made no mention of Niger, uranium, or the president’s address. (Note: The Butler report, “Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction,” which was released in the United Kingdom in July 2004, concluded that “the statement in President Bush’s State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003…was well founded.”)
arminius,
you are not a rare find these days.
Why do you guys ignore the testimony in December 1999 where it was stated clearly that 100% of his WMD manufacturing apparatus and up to 95% of his stockpiles were destroyed. Further it was the testimony that the remaining 5% would be decayed.
He may have still had some basic arsenal for use in a domestic attack, but the WMD that was used to threaten the US by GWBush wasn’t mustard gas, or even nerve gas, it was Nuclear. Don’t gloss that shit over now with petty talk about simple WMD supplies that would only kill those in a few yards radius of an attack.
And just because the Bush Admin and their well wired cohorts lied over and over doesn’t mean that everyone lied, that’s stupid, sorry. There were countless agencies all but screaming, WE AREN’T GOING TO FIND ANYTHING.
I’m freakin fed up with hearing, “everyone believed” when I didn’t, and most of the people I was reading and talking with at the time didn’t. Most critical voices were being masked on the MSM, but not overall. Al-Baredei was sure, Scott Ritter was sure.
The logical outcome of the Bush bullying was Saddam had no out because invasion was inevitable. They were determined to go to war in Iraq, and even Iran back then.
This has been well documented by the principles in the case, Cheney, Kristol, Wolfowitz, Schmidt, etc. They wanted this war, they got this war.
And Kenneth Pollack is an idiot, so quoting him doesn’t do much. He now pretends to once being a critic of going to war, which is utter bullshit. He may have been critical of the execution, but so has Bill O’Reilly and Tucker Carlson, so what. They even lie that they didn’t support going to war. My video tapes don’t lie though. His latest little pile of crap with Michael O’Hanlon was shot down the moment it posted. They’ve never been critics of going to war. O’Hanlon ain’t much betta. And it doesn’t matter what administration they were in. The world isn’t just two.
Was Plame one of the geniuses who gave the Iranians bluprint for a nuclear weapon in Operation Merlin? If so, shouldn’t she be charged with treason?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Merlin
Damn, do you even read what you post?
A FLAWED BLUEPRINT?
jeezuz, examine what you smear when you smear as you smear.
Your brain should charge your fingers with treason or your heart should charge your brain with treason.
If you set someone back by giving them fake plans they think would work…
How to build a nuclear bomb
First, find nuclear material
Second, pack it tightly into a shell
Third, bake at 450 until toasty or until you can stick a fork in it.
genius
George W. Bush’s sentence-by-sentence speaking skills are deteriorating. Apparently, this may be due to a mental illness called “presenile dementia.” Bush may or may not be secretly still drinking heavily. Bush lied, and thousands of people died. Bush suffers from narcissism and megalomania. Moreover, Bush has been arrested three times. Bush was arrested for disorderly conduct. Bush was arrested for stealing. Bush was also arrested for a serious crime—driving under the influence of alcohol. There are reasons to believe that Bush suffers from a learning disability. Bush’s learning disability would explain a lot of things. All in all, Bush is a severely mentally ill individual. Bush is not fit to be the president of the United States.
Bush should be locked up.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA